These People Are Crazy

2: an often blindly partisan advocate or adherent of a particular ideology

fan·nat·ic

noun

1. a person with an extreme and uncritical enthusiasm or zeal, as in religion or politics.

syc·o·phant

n. A servile self-seeker who attempts to win favor by flattering influential people.

Conservatives have pointed out for some time the rank hypocrisy of the left and its zeal for anything Obama. It is one thing to idealize the man, but we’ve seen the left literally strip down and bare it’s naked, fanatical obsession with Obama. The lefts “reaction” to the leaked White House memo on extra-judicial killing of American citizens would be comedic if it wasn’t so deadly serious.

The true sycophants have come out of the woodwork, focused on providing any excuse for Obama’s excessive abuse of power. But this, this is fanatical messianic zeal that should terrify most Americans:

What a stupid fucking twit. Here’s a prime example of how moronic and ill-informed left wing “experts” are. Obama is executing Bush’s drone program. Period. The only difference is that Obama has increased the number of strikes exponentially. Oh yeah, and he’s the only President to use a drone to kill an American citizen—correction—THREE American citizens. That’s right, it has been Mr. Responsible Obama—not Mr. Irresponsible Bush—to violate the Constitutionally protected 4th Amendment rights of U.S. citizens. Likewise, it has been Obama—not Bush—to significantly increase the number of civilian casualties from drone strikes. Yes, Obama has killed far more ‘innocent’ lives with the drone program than Bush ever did, but according to the left wing twit and her ilk, Obama deserves more trust because he’s apparently more responsible.

It is easy to let hyperbole enter politics and political discussions in general. I’ll admit that I detest Obama with every fabric of my being. I despise the man and everything he stands for: emphasis being on the latter. I don’t like Obama as a person because he is a liar, a narcissist, and an arrogant condescending prick, but it is what he believes and represents that I revile most.

But to get lectured by a cadre of people, who consistently demonstrate a dearth of intellectual integrity and stamina is beyond the pale. We’re consistently told that liberals are the true champions of civil liberties, even while it is liberals who work to constrain or remove Constitutional rights they don’t like (the 2nd Amendment), or limit speech they don’t agree with (fairness doctrine). However, there is no hypocrisy like this, to decry the abuses of power by Bush (warrantless wire taps, Patriot Act) and yet cuddle up to an Administration in Obama who has taken every single thing Bush did, and multiply by factors. Obama has expanded warrantless wire taps and Patriot Act actions, he has expanded drone operations and is openly granting himself the authority to be judge, jury and executioner against U.S. citizens that he deems a threat—an extremely slippery slope exceptionally explained by BiW.

In full disclosure, I’m torn at the drone program. Unlike the vast majority of Americans, I see the back story to a lot of this activity: who they’re going after and why; when they go or don’t; and what’s the justification for the operation. I’ve seen the program be extremely effective at hurting terrorist organizations and I can attest that the program has saved lives. That said, the judicial application of the program—and it has honestly been a judicial application—has not been because of Obama, but despite of Obama. Frankly, the heavy involvement of lawyers and the extreme sensitivity to collateral damage are efforts to protect against charges of flagrant killing. And this Administration has shown it is more than willing to throw anyone under the bus to scapegoat—just ask the CIA.

I do not trust Obama. It is the multiple cogs of middle and senior management in the various government entities that judiciously apply the programs. I actually support the premise from former Secretary of Defense Bob Gates to create FISA-like courts (or just expand the focus of the FISA courts themselves) for drone operations. Something to apply some checks and balances to an executive branch—and this Administration specifically—bent on expanding its power at the expense of Congress, the Courts and especially the people.

3 responses to “These People Are Crazy”

Some oversight would be better than NONE, but a “trial” in absentia in which a death penalty is a possiblitity isn’t much better than what we have now.

And for the record, if what we have been told about the people the program has been used on is true, then even with my objections, I’m finding it difficult to shed tears. However, it’s the “if what we’re told ” part that I have real trouble with. I also really wouldn’t have an issue with them being killed in an operation where they weren’t the PRIME target, but when the whole operation is built around specifically eliminating them…

But hey, the L.A. police are taking some time away from randomly shooting up innocent people in their search for Chris Dorner to talk about using drones to hunt him. What’s the worst that could happen?

You’re right. A trial in abstentia wouldn’t be much better, and if it was that they died as collateral, well, few tears would be shed. And I must agree, the public is relying purely on the good will of an Administration that has been caught repeatedly lying to the American people. They deserve no trust, nor the benefit of the doubt, which leaves us at the mercy of the government bureaucrats actually focused on those operations. In my Nixon comment to Alfie, you can see where I think that’s taking us, but I don’t know what options we’ve left on this very narrow issue.

It’s easy to get confused on the Administrations position considering that they refuse to treat the Ft. Hood shooting as an act of terror—even though we’ve got a truck load of evidence showing his intent to cause terror. Further there’s always that weird bit of how enhance interrogation is bad but a hellfire up the ass is good?